EVE Information Portal

They want to protect EVE Uni and make large ISK sink so they are ******* everybody else.


@ CCP
Why you don't want money from ppl that like to make something and not destroy???

It may be wise to base the fees on the mineral basket. Buying a battleship BPO used to be a big deal. The 8 million gold problem, you know.

oh my god CCP havent you learnt any thing yet first the fail on walk-in-station and the nex shop and now you found a new thing that impact you player base = real money income. i see some stocks that will fall when all small corps stops there sub's because of this war crap you have in plan now didn you learn from last time, do we really have to blow up jita 4-4 up again and maybe take the 3 other trade hubs to before you learn to listen, at the concerned player base that actual keep you job running by subscript. but ok im not the guy to judge that its you ceo that needs to make a new sorry player speech thats all from me and i will unsubscript all i got in this game because i dont want to take part in this havoc of stupidity. and guys im not great at gramma so if you want to troll this its ok i dont care i just want ccp to step back and look at the big picture off eve and not only the box-of-war they got going on here

Very bad ideas indeed. The assumption here is that persons or corps wanting to avoid war are the problem. But the most basic problem of wardeccing is of aggressors using the mechanism for nothing more that grieving and/or easy kills against corps that choose a non-fighting way of eve live and are therefore by definition underskilled in pvp fighting (i.e. industrials corps). This very basic flaw of war deccing is not addressed at all: wars can still be declared for no reason whatsoever. All it does (wardeccing) is forcing a playstyle upon corps that they do no want to persue, i.e. it is fundamentally ignoring the right to choose your own way of eve live. Which for me is one of the most important aspects that made me addicted to eve. You want pew-pew, go low-sec or null-sec, or become a pirate and risk being CONCORded.

Also, though comparing eve with real life mechanics is not always relevant, think about this: in which countries can you go to the police and say: "hey, here you've got 10000 us dollars, now let beat up my neighbours for a week without you guys interveninh". Well, certainly not in the countries we can consider as being "high-sec". Really, war-deccing is a flawed, uneccessary concept.

For the most part I really like what I see in this. A few edge cases to maybe consider though.

RvB has a permanent mutual war going. If someone attacks Blue, Blue should still be able to call on Red as an ally even though we are at war with them.

We often have members switching sides to help keep the war between RvB balanced. We need a way to do this even when a third party war decs us.

Those are my two main concerns and the first one can be solved just by having Reds war dec the third party, just might cost us a fair bit when it maybe shouldn't.

My 2 cents

I understand that EvE is a sandbox game and that the idea is to allow people to pretty much whatever their hearts desire. My issue comes from the fact that only one portion of the “potential” community gets to play in the sandbox. There is a large casual or “carebear” portion of the community and they are a part that gets a lot of crap in game. casual corporations tend to get a disproportionate number of war decks, they have issues transitioning to living in 0.0 if they can get out there at all. there are also a lot of people that enjoy industry, high sec mining, marketing or even running missions these people are not necessarily interested in PvP and being forced to PvP ruins their enjoyment of the game.

The new War Deceleration system hurts a lot of the aforementioned people. there needs to be a way for the casuals, industrialists to have relative safety in high sec. Either make a type of corporation where they pay some fee and they cant be war decked or make an NPC corporation that is for them or something.

I belonged to a corporation that I loved it was a missioning and production corporation. I enjoyed running with the people in it and had fun, but there was a 5 man corporation that insisted on war decking it constantly they would sit outside the stations we used and use a neutral orca to do whatever they did so we could never seem to kill us, then if we got enough people to actually fight them they would simply run and hide in station, we tried hiring mercenaries but they simply played on their alts until our mercenary contract ran out then war decked us again. I have herd too many stories like this.

I am not against PvP I love PvP in eve and when a war deck is mutual it is a lot of fun, but too many people simply use it as a griefing tool and in the long run this runs off customers from the game, perhaps not lots of customers but I would think that CCP would value all their paying customers.

Pretty much. This is just a mega alliance protection racket sanctioned by CCP. All this does is herd people into them at the expense of smaller operations trying to escape mega alliance drama. What a bunch of Uni butt-lickers CCP has become.

They are the problem because they feel entitled to not defend themselves and inject commodities and isk into the game endlessly without cost, while competing with individuals and organizations that do. It's an unfair advantage that stifles emergent content and the best solution is one that puts all organizations on equal footing so that the most lucrative targets are gone after. This means the elimination of decshields and NPC corps.

I don't like the idea of rewarding big corps and alliances for bunching up together by penalizing those who wardec them.
Being part of a huge group should carry its own rewards by having the ability to defend themselves.
If they are terrified of some 10-man corp wardec then they don't deserve to exist.

CCP you have totally missed the point.

The problem with wars is not the shedding/shielding, that is the workaround to the problem.

The problem is that the wardec system as it is now is a "pay to grief button"

It is true that the system needs changes, but the solutions you have presented show that devs do not understand the PvE player at all.

Yes wars should be possible, yes any and every player corp should be targetable, but you have to allow a way for the defender (95% of the time a non pvp corp of younger players than the aggressor) to win.

As it is now when an indy corp is decced you have very few options;
1) Fight back, not really viable, the aggressor chose you because they think they can win, hence they are older, better equipped, more knowledgable, have intel on you, have an army of remote rep and scouting alts and possibly spies in your corp. By fighting back you give the aggressor exactly what they want, entertainment, fights and kills. Nobody wins a war by giving the enemy what they want.

2) Stay docked up, why exactly do you pay a subscription to sit staring at a docked spaceship? but this is often the most effective solution to a war, deny the enemy what he wants, do not engage, do not entertain them, bore them into going away.

3) Pay a ransom, lol, seriously? if you pay a ransom you deserve the redec you get each and every one of them.

The new system as proposed has a few decent features, the ally system looks good I like that, as is making war a committment, however you have only made it a committment for the defender, the aggressor is still free to do as they want.
Increasing the cost of war is good, the way it has been done will encourage roster stuffing and discourages decs against the major power blocs which is bad.

I like a few of the player suggestions in this thread, the pot of cash for meeting a predetermined victory condition, one that is viable for the defender (non pvp corp remember) to achieve.

For ex, war is won if the aggressor can destroy 1 bil isk worth of shipping, or if the defender can make 10 kills of any kind against the aggressor. (dont let the aggressor chose the victory conditions for the love of God)

If the war turns in the favour of the defender+ allies then control of the war should automatically swap to them, control should be determined by being closer to the victory conditions than your opponent.

Either way wars need fixing, your current solution although showing potential is woefully aggressor biased and in need of changes.

Thanks
Evil Incarn8.

What you mean is "if you ban small corps you will destroy the pretense of not massively favoring Null Bears and since more than two thirds of players are High Sec they will leave Eve and CCP will go bankrupt".

That would be correct.